BLOCKBUSTER! Syrian Rebels Take Responsibility For Chemical Attack...

[hazlnut]

Admitting The Weapons Were Provided By Saudis


Syrian rebels admitted in an interview with Dale Gavlak, a Middle East correspondent for the Associated Press and Mint Press News, that they were responsible for last week’s chemical attack.

“From numerous interviews with doctors, Ghouta residents, rebel fighters and their families….many believe that certain rebels received chemical weapons via the Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, and were responsible for carrying out the (deadly) gas attack,” he writes in the article.

The rebels noted it was a result of an accident caused by rebels mishandling chemical weapons provided to them.

“My son came to me two weeks ago asking what I thought the weapons were that he had been asked to carry,” said Abu Abdel-Moneim, the father of a rebel fighting to unseat Assad, who lives in Ghouta.

As Gavlak reports, Abdel-Moneim said his son and 12 other rebels died in a weapons storage tunnel. The father stated the weapons were provided to rebel forces by a Saudi militant, known as Abu Ayesha, describing them as having a “tube-like structure” while others were like a “huge gas bottle.”

“They didn’t tell us what these arms were or how to use them,” complained a female fighter named ‘K’. “We didn’t know they were chemical weapons. We never imagined they were chemical weapons.”

“When Saudi Prince Bandar gives such weapons to people, he must give them to those who know how to handle and use them,” she warned. She, like other Syrians, do not want to use their full names for fear of retribution...

Read more: 'Syrian rebels take responsibility for the chemical attack admitting the weapons were provided by Saudis' - source - News - World - The Voice of Russia: News, Breaking news, Politics, Economics, Business, Russia, International current events, Expert
BLOCKBUSTER! Syrian rebels take responsibility for the chemical attack admitting the weapons were provided by Saudis | Peace . Gold . Liberty

Let's put a pin in that, wait for some more credible investigation.



And that means this Saudi is an accomplice to war a war crime?




And we're fucked if we have to wait for the U.N. to sort this all out -- another institution that has outlived its usefulness.

 

[Vox]

xxxxxxx

 

[hazlnut]

Wow. This is some seriously funny shit.

Bush jails citizens without habeaus corpus, waterboards detainees, spies on tens of millions of Americans, starts two wars, creates a massive new Cabinet level department, grows the size of the federal government, doubles the national debt, and creates a massive new entitlement program. The faux conservatives defended and apoligized for ALL of that shit from beginning to end, while simultaneously screaming for war with Iran.

This very day, the same people bitch and whine about Obama tossing a couple missles at Syria, and tremble over the propsect of an imaginary war in their minds.

This brings hypocrisy to a whole new level.

Brilliant post.

Well said!!

 

[Vox]

Let's put a pin in that, wait for some more credible investigation.



And that means this Saudi is an accomplice to war a war crime?




And we're fucked if we have to wait for the U.N. to sort this all out -- another institution that has outlived its usefulness.

do you have a warmonger's itch to go and bomb innocent civilians in Syria?

 

[The T]

TD, you sound like the Bushie bedwetters.

No, there is no question the Syrian regime did this, and the regime will pay for it, and we may get Assad.

How do you know there is no question that Assad regime used gas?

If you believe he did then what in the hell would his motive be? To provoke Washington into trying to regime change by yet another killing?

Because John F'ing Kerry [Who served in Viet Nam], a couple hours ago said so...


I personally don't belive what they are saying.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

Appeasement is only valid when applied to major world movements not internal strife.

 

[R.C. Christian]

I'm no liberal Stuckey. I just don't want WWIII.

 

[The T]

Let's put a pin in that, wait for some more credible investigation.



And that means this Saudi is an accomplice to war a war crime?




And we're fucked if we have to wait for the U.N. to sort this all out -- another institution that has outlived its usefulness.

do you have a warmonger's itch to go and bomb innocent civilians in Syria?

Any WAR by a Democrat Statist is justified...even if it may be trumped up to save a legacy... to divert attention to their domestic woes that the MEDIA has miraculously ceased speaking of...

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

TD, you sound like the Bushie bedwetters.

No, there is no question the Syrian regime did this, and the regime will pay for it, and we may get Assad.

How do you know there is no question that Assad regime used gas?

If you believe he did then what in the hell would his motive be? To provoke Washington into trying to regime change by yet another killing?

I personally don't belive what they are saying.

That's how I felt when I listened to Kerry but what can you do? A juggernaut is hard to stop.

 

[JakeStarkey]

There will be no WWIII, because Putin will not start one over Assad.

 

[BlindBoo]

Wow. This is some seriously funny shit.

Bush jails citizens without habeaus corpus, waterboards detainees, spies on tens of millions of Americans, starts two wars, creates a massive new Cabinet level department, grows the size of the federal government, doubles the national debt, and creates a massive new entitlement program. The faux conservatives defended and apoligized for ALL of that shit from beginning to end, while simultaneously screaming for war with Iran.

This very day, the same people bitch and whine about Obama tossing a couple missles at Syria, and tremble over the propsect of an imaginary war in their minds.

This brings hypocrisy to a whole new level.

I don't recall the faux conservatives apologizing for any of that shit.

But hell, in 16 years or so maybe their guy will be able to use the fact that Syria used Chemical Weapons on Civilians to launch a war they can support. Maybe that's it, Obama doesn't have plans to invade and occupy a fucking country, that why they really don't support a limited military strike.

HUH? Are you blind?

Really? A limited military strike?


Syria: Russia And US Send Warships To Med


Russia is said to be deploying warships as the US boosts its military capacity in the region with a guided missile destroyer.[/B]

.

Has the President suggested anything else? Or are you just afraid of the US standing up to Russia?

I oppose the strikes because I'm anti-interventionist across the board unless our national security is involved, not because mean old mother Russia sent a war ship into the Mediterranean. I don't see how the Syrian Civil war affects our national security. But then I don't have enough information to make the call......

 

[francoHFW]

+OP- obvious BS LOL

Bomb their runways so they have no jets for a while. NOBODY but Assad will really mind. No chemical weapons!

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

Your philosophy is appeasement, the same behavior that emboldened Hitler, another reactionary.

Appeasement is only valid when applied to major world movements not internal strife.

Because you say so, cupcake? Another appeaser. Whose comment is worth zero

You're stupidly applying appeasement to a Civil War in a small country and expect people to accept that. Do you think your audience is ignorant like you.

 

[The T]

Obama, IF he goes on with this? Will be stepping into something WE may not ever recover....

 

[JakeStarkey]

You and your ilk, such as The T and Vox, are unable to understand that if Assad is not reined in now because of you cowardly reactionary appeasers, he could start WWIII because of you folks.

Guess what: that is not going to happen because the USA will strike him.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

That's a big if. Do you understand the implications of WWIII?

 

[The T]

How do you know there is no question that Assad regime used gas?

If you believe he did then what in the hell would his motive be? To provoke Washington into trying to regime change by yet another killing?

I personally don't belive what they are saying.

That's how I felt when I listened to Kerry but what can you do? A juggernaut is hard to stop.

Is it really? it is NOT...EVER. The PEOPLE can and should. To become apathetic as you have just exhibited isn't the American WAY...NOT what we have ever been about.

WHOM is in control? The Political elitists, or those of us that hire them?

Not hard to answer now, is it?

 

[JakeStarkey]

You obviously don't: the implications is that WWIII is far more likely if Assad is not taken down.

 

[Vox]

Obama NEEDS a war. To divert attention from the problems inside the country and to tighten the grip of internal police on American liberties - this is a blessing for them, so he is going to step into that. Most likely. Though the countyr can not afford this war and does not have anything to win in it.

But the irony of this - libtard bedwetters who were screaming all their lungs off during the Bush era - "poor Iraqi children, poor civilians, we are killing them" - now are screaming their lungs out in support of bombing Syrian children and civilians.

And the libtard bots a.k.a. fakey jumping ahead from their diaper with a banner - "bomb them, bomb them, our missile strike is more humane than their gas

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

Syria is going to start WWIII? Your dishonesty is obscene. Willfully attacking 4 countries in the Middle East doesn't qualify though? America is the one pushing it to the absolute limit.